Cars v. Bikes

Dsemaj

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 3, 2006
Messages
2,956
Location
Adelaide, Australia.
Car(s)
2003 Urabus Impreza WRX, 1997 Fraud Falcs EL Wagon
Ugh. Give me more pointers to prove to this idiot friend that says bikes are better than cars.

He thinks you have to work harder to get a bike because the best MV Augusta costs $AUD180k, more than a $AUD150k HSV. Which is an Italian motorbike.

He rather be hit by side on by a car on a bike because...

James:
Old fucking fart in his Camry that's fucking aroudn with the radio, trying to get 1323 CruiseAM too much to notice anything
James:
Well, more risk of dying on a bike than in a car
`Alexander~James- Wants his motorbike licence Hayabusa says:
drives into the side of your car
`Alexander~James- Wants his motorbike licence Hayabusa says:
coz he runs the red light fiddlin wit his knobs
`Alexander~James- Wants his motorbike licence Hayabusa says:
and paralyses u from neck down
James:
I've got seatbelts, crumple zones, airbags
`Alexander~James- Wants his motorbike licence Hayabusa says:
at least if u were on motorbike ud have been flug across n slid along road. broken bones. but ud have your spine still
James:
You have nothing to protect you apart from airbags in your leathers if you're lucky enough
James:
Nothing to slow you down apart from hard concrete
`Alexander~James- Wants his motorbike licence Hayabusa says:
friction from concrete. takes off flesh
`Alexander~James- Wants his motorbike licence Hayabusa says:
but slows u down safely. whiplash fucks drivers over coz they stop so fukin fast
James:
G-forces from smacking into ground, more force because you'd slow way faster and harsher hitting the ground
`Alexander~
concrete tears thru ya leathers and your elbows and knees are showin down to the bone
James:
And you're dead because you've smacked the ground going 60km/h and you're bleeding to death from internal bleeding and broken bones.
James:
What happened this weekend? A biker died because he crashed, feel off his bike and got hit by a car.
People only drive cars because of a fear of driving motorbikes...

(Forgetting comfort, practically, driving with... your mates... and so on)

He talks about how bikes are faster through the corners. How? Less tyre width + 2 less wheels = less mechanical grip. End of story.

I mean, I don't get it. I'm sure there's sensible bike enthusiasts, but why on earth does this guy even think he's even close to the truth? Insane.
 

Spectre

The Deported
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
36,871
Location
Dallas, Texas
Car(s)
00 4Runner | 02 919 | 87 XJ6 | 86 CB700SC
Bikes *are* better than cars, but not for the reasons he thinks. :p

You may want to remind him what happens if you hit a solid object while flying through the air after getting ejected from a bike.
 

airmenair

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2005
Messages
2,556
Location
Arlington, Texas, USA
Well as far as the cornering bit, show him the clip from Top Gear where they race a car vs. a bike around the test track.

As far as the rest goes...Its hard to convince anyone of anything, especially when it comes down to personal preference. I won't argue with the safety bit, I'd get a bike myself if I wasn't afraid I'd kill myself on it.

EDIT: NVM, he thinks bikes are safer. I'd like to know the proportion of bike deaths to bike wrecks and car deaths to car wrecks. I think the former will be higher.
 

NooDle

Ik ben niet alleen lekker met kaas!
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
9,658
Location
Belgium
Car(s)
VW eGolf, Hyundai Kona 1.0
how about this : in a bike, YOU are the crumple zone
 

Karoug

Techno Viking
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
6,473
Location
Sweden
Car(s)
Scooter power!!
It's true that a supercar will pull more G's in a corner that a bike. But you need something really expensive to do that.

But i'm not saying a bike is better than a car, it's a different experience and prefer bikes but i also like cars.
But before you can argue either way, you should be comfortable on both.

And don't be like Mr. Clarkson: "I'm afraid of bikes so therefor i must argue that they are useless."
 

LeVeL

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
13,265
Dont pro race bikes manage just over 1g? Around a corner a car will win, hands down. Down the straights, its a different story.
As far as safety is concerned - what your friend is saying is just silly. Cars are definately safer overall.
 

prizrak

Forum Addict
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
21,601
Location
No, sleep, till, BROOKLYN
Car(s)
11 Xterra Pro-4x, 12 'stang GT
I like both bikes and cars but having 3500lbs of metal, air bags, reinforcement frames and crumple zones around you is MUCH safer than having some leather. A friend of mine is great proof of that, fell off his bike broke his knew fucked up the rest of his body pretty bad was on temp disability for like 6 months. Wasn't even going that fast. Not to mention that the accident he had would not happen in a car period as he hit some kind of a pothole that made him fall off.

Cornering speeds, well they are getting pretty close these days with new tires, however a car will always be much easier to corner fast in than a bike because no matter what there is a much lower chance of side by side tires losing traction completely and suddenly.
 

vanMould

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
903
Location
S?dert?lje, Sweden
Car(s)
Volvo 480ES -88
He talks about how bikes are faster through the corners. How? Less tyre width + 2 less wheels = less mechanical grip. End of story.
I've learned that the size of the contact surface is actually irrelevant when it comes to grip. A smaller area still supports the same weight, so the pressure rises and the friction remains the same. Tyre wear increases though.

However, the high point of gravity on a motorbike makes it easy for a sportscar to outbrake it, and that's probably the main reason why the Atom beat the motorbike on TG.

Just speculating here...
 

Alok

The TomTom did it.
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
4,558
Location
Germany
Car(s)
Seat Leon Cupra 5F
The hard fact is, if someone is in love with bikes, there is no way you can convince him/her otherwise. That'd be like telling Icebone to get an Apple.
 

Suedschleife

Subtitling God
Joined
Sep 6, 2007
Messages
802
Location
Colonia Claudia Ara Agrippinensium, Germania
I've learned that the size of the contact surface is actually irrelevant when it comes to grip. A smaller area still supports the same weight, so the pressure rises and the friction remains the same. Tyre wear increases though.

However, the high point of gravity on a motorbike makes it easy for a sportscar to outbrake it, and that's probably the main reason why the Atom beat the motorbike on TG.

Just speculating here...
While this is true for solid objects, a tire is not solid and the coefficient of friction of rubber is not a constant. Adhesive friction is very much dependent on contact area. The increased contact pressure of narrower tires itself increases contact area as well, but let's not go there for now.
 

DarkReaper

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2005
Messages
1,278
Location
Germany
Car(s)
BMW635CSI'86.BMW850CI'96 MotoGuzzi California EV
Sideways g between bikes and cars aren't that much different. Cars may have a higher capability for instantaneous g because they aren't limited by lean angle but the continuous g that they can hold is far lower. Usually less than 1g even for top of the line sports cars. Oh yeah I will disregard aero downforce in this. Most cars develop considerable "upforce" anyway.

A bike at 45? lean angle can produce a constant lateral acceleration of 1g and modern high-performance street tyres are rated for a maximum of 53? lean angle, though you are likely to run out of clearance and courage way before that. While the contact patch of the bike is far smaller it also weighs a lot less than a car and usually has stickier tyres. Less weight means less centrifugal force that has to be countered by more grip.

Also a car that is going very fast into a corner unloads their innermost wheel which reduces the grip available from those tyres. Dynamic wheel loading only compensates for some of it.

Braking performance for modern bikes isn't really limited by tyre grip but rather the tendency of the bike to somersault, also known as a stoppy. For most sport bikes this is usually around 1-1.1g.
There is also the mental barrier to account for, because if your front loses grip at max brake the bike just snaps down instantly. Reaction time (including time to actually carry out the adjustment) needed to keep yourself from crashing is at maybe 0.1-0.3 seconds, though my subjective measurement might be off a bit.
If you lose tyre grip while braking in a car you either have abs doing all the work for you or you start understeering (on street brake ratios at least).

Btw losing tyre grip on warm rubber while straight line accelerating on a bike is nigh on impossible. Usually you start to wheely before that, so more than 1g straight acceleration again.

In short a bike is limited more by it's short wheelbase than it's tyre grip. That is also why drag bikes use very long swingarms to counter wheelies.

Food for thought:
Bike weight with rider: 270 kg
Guestimated car tyre width equivalent 100mm on the back, 50mm on the front-> 150mm in total
Bike and car tyre radius is about the same so length of the compact patch isn't that different. Though I guess that the increased weight of the car will yield maybe 40% more.

Usual Car weight: 1600kg
Car tyre width: 225mm x 4=900mm + 40%= 1260mm equivalent

Centripetal force needed at 1g: Car 15696N, Bike 2649N -> Bike needs to create about 6 times less force for same radius-> 1260/6=210mm needed.

So bikes aren't that far off and car tyres usually have a smaller contact patch in corners than in a straight line coupled with the innermost wheels having a very small patch.

Oh yeah all those numbers were pulled out of my ass.
 
Last edited:

MadCow809

Forum Addict
Joined
Feb 23, 2006
Messages
6,375
Try stop a moving vehicle with your bike, you might be an excellent rider, but what about the rest of the drivers on the road?

I just got back from Taiwan, and boy do those bikers ride like bloody retards. They try and squeeze into every single possible gap just so they can make it to the front of the traffic. It is EXTREMELY dangerous and fucking annoying for normal car drivers when you are constantly surrounded by 4 or more scooters/bikes around your car.

Sure, bikes offer the most direct adrenaline rush and the thrill for speed, but seriously... is it really worth it? How would you feel when you end up either as a vegetable or paralysed for life?

Maybe it's different in Australia, I'm not too clued up on the local traffic, but if it's anything like a crowded asian city, try and avoid getting a bike as a daily commuting tool.

But yes, I have to admit, bikes offer the best speed experience, and I can understand why ppl choose to ignore the danger behind it, because it is that addictive. And don't even bring performance into the equation, a 600cc bike will pretty much smoke anything on the road, let alone litre bikes. Cars can't even come close to a bike in terms of straightline speed, well, on public roads at least, race track is a different story.
 
Last edited:

Dogbert

Helsinki Smash Rod
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
6,458
Location
N38? 43', W90? 22'
Car(s)
Roger Dean's Rocks
I, personally, am completely flummoxed by having to use my hand for both accelerating, braking, and turning. That's my personal reason for not ever riding a bike, seeing as how I've crashed a Vespa and broken my leg and foot quite badly because of said flummoxing.

Also, I don't like my face being a crumple zone.
 

DarkReaper

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2005
Messages
1,278
Location
Germany
Car(s)
BMW635CSI'86.BMW850CI'96 MotoGuzzi California EV
Meh, you use your hands for turning, shifting and handling random knobs on the dash and use your feet to clutch, brake and accelerate on a car.

At least on a bike every control has it's own assigned limb and you don't have to move an inch to reach them. Also all the delicate controls are operated by hand and only digital stuff like the gear lever or stuff you never use like the rear brake are operated by foot. If I used my unprecise foot for accelerating or braking on a bike I would likely do a face plant around every corner. Normal city driving on a bike requires maybe 3-5mm of throttle travel.
 

tigger

Forum Addict
Joined
Dec 11, 2006
Messages
5,737
Car(s)
'88 Vic Wagon, '92 Honda VFR
How would you feel when you end up either as a vegetable or paralysed for life?
I'd be glad that I didn't spend my life up until that point being a chickenshit. ;)

Yes, on a bike you are the crumple zone. To counter that, you're more agile than a car and much more aware of your surroundings. And because of the control layout, you can respond much faster than in a car. Those few factors have saved me a couple times where, had I been in a car, I would have been in a wreck.
 

MadCow809

Forum Addict
Joined
Feb 23, 2006
Messages
6,375
I'd be glad that I didn't spend my life up until that point being a chickenshit. ;)

Yes, on a bike you are the crumple zone. To counter that, you're more agile than a car and much more aware of your surroundings. And because of the control layout, you can respond much faster than in a car. Those few factors have saved me a couple times where, had I been in a car, I would have been in a wreck.
So you are happy being a vegetable? What a brilliant way to spend the rest of your life

chicken shit?? nah, I call it surrounding awareness, because knowing that the public road is an extremely danerous environment for bikes. Taking it on a race track is a completely differnet story, that is what I call courage, at the same time, the appropriate place to enjoy the speed that a 2 wheeler can offer.

And agility doesnt mean much, it only takes once to catch you off guard and it's game over.

You can't really enjoy what a 2 wheeler can offer on public roads, so why choose a bike over a car as a daily commuting tool?? Note the keyword here "commuting tool". Personally I like bikes but I don't like them on public roads, well at least on congested public roads.

But at the end of the day, it the choice that you made, so if you are happy to live by it without any regrets, I guess you've made the right choice.
 
Last edited:

tigger

Forum Addict
Joined
Dec 11, 2006
Messages
5,737
Car(s)
'88 Vic Wagon, '92 Honda VFR
You can't really enjoy what a 2 wheeler can offer on public roads, so why choose a bike over a car as a daily commuting tool?? Note the keyword here "commuting tool". Personally I like bikes but I don't like them on public roads, well at least on congested public roads.
Sure you can enjoy what a bike offers on the road. You can try to make the same argument against fast cars. Why don't we all just drive Geo Metros, huh? Plus it's just so much ... nicer riding a motorcycle.

Half the reason I bought my Honda was as a 'commuting tool'. It gets ~60-70mpg, insurance is 1/6th of what my car costs me, I can park it anywhere, etc etc. It's vastly more economical than my car, which I can park for most of the year and save a ton on its insurance.
 

prizrak

Forum Addict
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
21,601
Location
No, sleep, till, BROOKLYN
Car(s)
11 Xterra Pro-4x, 12 'stang GT
But yes, I have to admit, bikes offer the best speed experience, and I can understand why ppl choose to ignore the danger behind it, because it is that addictive. And don't even bring performance into the equation, a 600cc bike will pretty much smoke anything on the road, let alone litre bikes. Cars can't even come close to a bike in terms of straightline speed, well, on public roads at least, race track is a different story.
HA! Come to Brooklyn and race any bike against even a shittiest Civic and you WILL lose on most roads. Mostly because if you try to go as fast as said Civic you will not be on your bike for very long ;) *grumble* stupid fucking shitty ass roads *grumble*
You can't really enjoy what a 2 wheeler can offer on public roads, so why choose a bike over a car as a daily commuting tool??
Because I can go between cars and park just about anywhere that even the tiniest of the tiny Smarts can't :) You being from CA I'm surprised you wouldn't take a bike over a car for commuting since you can use it year round. Around here it wouldn't work too well.
 

klutch

Courteous urinator
Joined
Jan 6, 2006
Messages
1,913
Location
Vancouver, BC
Car(s)
Do it for me.
Bikes require more out of the rider to go fast; yes, they can keep up with even the most expensive of exotics in the corners, but that's more down to the rider than the bike. Modern sportbikes are all remarkably similar in their cornering performance, but riders that can get the most out of them are few and far between.



As far as being safer...no. Bikers don't call car drivers "cagers" for nothing.
 
Top